Afghanistan: We come in peace [shoot to kill]
Des Browne told the House of Commons on Thursday that the British mission in Afghanistan is not confused. He asserted that to suggest it is confused - that British troops in Afghanistan are there for some purpose other than reconstruction - such as 'hunting the Taliban' - puts the lives of troops at risk who are charged with the task of going into villages and explaining that 'we are the good chaps' - 'not American' -'we come in peace' - 'do you need anything reconstructed today?' etc. We are beginning to understand just how successful this strategy is. From last week's report in the Sunday Times from Christina Lamb:
What followed was a hair-raising account of an intense battle between the 'peacekeepers' and Afghans the likes of which even the most experienced troops present had never endured before. This particular session of reaching out for hearts and minds ended with the eventual arrival of US military in A10's - which did what US A10 pilots know best.
Rather than seek to stifle debate - which is clearly what Des Browne intends to do if you follow the Hansard link below - he should ask himself why, if it's so dangerous for our troops to be perceived as 'Taliban Hunters' he allowed the participation of British troops in the US dominated 'Operation Mountain Thrust' - which is described as the biggest anti-Taliban offensive since 2001 and involves 10,000 combat troops from primarily the US, Canada and Britain and Afghan National Army. Karzai himself objected to its sheer brutality - it has now killed 1000 of what the US describes as 'Taliban fighters' in the south.
Message to Des Browne: The Taliban don't need to read Hansard to establish who is participating in Operation Mountain Thrust.
See below part of Thursday's exchange in the House of Commons followed by a couple of reports - much easier to read than Hansard - concerning the fact that Britain is engaged on a Taliban Hunt - which again indicates that both our Afghanistan strategy and our Defence Sec are more confused than ever. The final piece below is from Simon Jenkins of the Guardian who has spotted the same problem.
HANSARD
6 July 2006 : Column 1007 - Des Browne [Defence Sec]
Some people - I exclude everyone whom I see in the House at the moment - suggest that there is confusion about what our troops are doing there, but our troops are going into villages in Afghanistan and telling people what their mission is, because they know and understand what it is. That puts the lives of our troops in danger, however, and anyone who does not understand that is getting perilously close to being guilty of criminal negligence. We are asking our troops to go out and explain to the local people that they are there for reconstruction purposes. If the Taliban are able to relay, from discussions that take place in the United Kingdom, that that is not the case, and that we are there for some other purpose - such as hunting the Taliban - or that our primary focus is crop eradication, that would put our troops in danger, given the nature of Afghanistan. We must be very careful about how we debate these issues in the House.
"We are British not Americans," explained the major through an interpreter..."We come at the invitation of your government as friends and brothers to help you and find out what you need."
"... I think that went well - they seemed quite friendly," he said to me as we walked away....Within seconds we heard the staccato crack of Kalashnikovs. I threw myself into a ditch as bullets whizzed overhead.
"Helmets on!" shouted someone. "Put your f****** helmets on!" Link
What followed was a hair-raising account of an intense battle between the 'peacekeepers' and Afghans the likes of which even the most experienced troops present had never endured before. This particular session of reaching out for hearts and minds ended with the eventual arrival of US military in A10's - which did what US A10 pilots know best.
Rather than seek to stifle debate - which is clearly what Des Browne intends to do if you follow the Hansard link below - he should ask himself why, if it's so dangerous for our troops to be perceived as 'Taliban Hunters' he allowed the participation of British troops in the US dominated 'Operation Mountain Thrust' - which is described as the biggest anti-Taliban offensive since 2001 and involves 10,000 combat troops from primarily the US, Canada and Britain and Afghan National Army. Karzai himself objected to its sheer brutality - it has now killed 1000 of what the US describes as 'Taliban fighters' in the south.
Message to Des Browne: The Taliban don't need to read Hansard to establish who is participating in Operation Mountain Thrust.
See below part of Thursday's exchange in the House of Commons followed by a couple of reports - much easier to read than Hansard - concerning the fact that Britain is engaged on a Taliban Hunt - which again indicates that both our Afghanistan strategy and our Defence Sec are more confused than ever. The final piece below is from Simon Jenkins of the Guardian who has spotted the same problem.
HANSARD
6 July 2006 : Column 1007 - Des Browne [Defence Sec]
Some people - I exclude everyone whom I see in the House at the moment - suggest that there is confusion about what our troops are doing there, but our troops are going into villages in Afghanistan and telling people what their mission is, because they know and understand what it is. That puts the lives of our troops in danger, however, and anyone who does not understand that is getting perilously close to being guilty of criminal negligence. We are asking our troops to go out and explain to the local people that they are there for reconstruction purposes. If the Taliban are able to relay, from discussions that take place in the United Kingdom, that that is not the case, and that we are there for some other purpose - such as hunting the Taliban - or that our primary focus is crop eradication, that would put our troops in danger, given the nature of Afghanistan. We must be very careful about how we debate these issues in the House.
Guardian:"I am confident the situation will improve by the end of this year," Lieutenant General Karl Eikenberry told Pentagon reporters last week. But Mountain Thrust is mixed news for British officers, who had vowed to differentiate themselves from the Americans through a softer approach to win hearts and minds. Now they find themselves swept along in an aggressive operation that may crush the insurgency but could also inflame a new generation of anti-foreign fighters. Link
CNN: Fighting over the last two days in southern Afghanistan's Helmand province has left a British soldier and 35 militants dead.Simon Jenkins in The Guardian: ... if "hearts and minds" is to be theAfghan-friendly face of Nato operations, who sent British troops to join the Americans in their current farewell burst of machismo, Operation Mountain Thrust? It is reported to have slaughtered over 500 Taliban, mostly from the air and thus killing almost anyone. It was not designed to establish the secure zones advocated by Britain's Nato general, David Richards. It is merely killing young Afghans and recruiting their relatives to the Taliban cause, to Karzai's reported fury. He knows soon he must negotiate with the Taliban or die. Link
...The action was part of Operation Mountain Thrust, a heavy push by U.S.-led coalition forces to rout out Taliban insurgents and extend Kabul's rule into eastern and southern Afghanistan.Link
posted by exoplanet at 5:51 PM
<< Home